NTP to get patent cash from “pretty much” entire cell phone industry

Company that got $612.5M from RIM settles with Apple, Microsoft, Google, more.

NTP Inc., a patent-holding company that won a $612.5 million settlement from RIM in 2006, has struck again with a settlement involving 13 of the biggest companies in the tech industry.

NTP, noting that it holds eight US patents "relating to the delivery of electronic mail over wireless systems," today said it reached a settlement with 13 companies representing just about everyone involved in building and selling smartphones or delivering e-mail to them. The 13 companies are AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile, Apple, HTC, Motorola Mobility, Palm, LG, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.

"The signed agreement provides broad coverage under NTP’s patent portfolio to all of the companies," NTP said. Consequently, "all pending litigation between NTP and these companies will be dismissed."

With the exception of Nokia and RIM, who were already paying NTP, the settlement covered "pretty much the entire industry," said intellectual property attorney Ron Epstein, who was settlement counsel for NTP and used to run Intel's licensing group. But when asked if that means NTP is done filing lawsuits, Epstein told us there are a couple more companies in NTP's sights.

Terms of the agreement were not disclosed, but Epstein told Ars that the companies involved "were able to provide a financial return to patent owners that they're happy with and provide substantial discounts to each of the participating parties." He said the deal is unique in that it covered a large number of companies rather than just one, and happened somewhat independently of any lawsuit. Pending litigation had been stayed while the US Patent and Trademark Office re-examined NTP patents, he said.

NTP has been called a "patent troll," namely a company that makes no technology of its own but uses patents to sue others. While NTP doesn't make any of its own technology, Epstein said it was created with the intention of building technology, not suing. NTP was founded by Thomas Campana, who filed for and received dozens of patents before dying in 2004. One representative patent describes an "Electronic mail system with RF communications to mobile processors," and was awarded to Campana in 2001.

Epstein said NTP did try to make its own products in the early 1990s, but was too early. "NTP [and its predecessor company] was working on building systems to send e-mail over wireless systems in 1990, '91, and '92," Epstein said. "In that era, almost no one had e-mail, and cell phones were the size of brief cases. They were way too early. They were founded to become a product company, but they were founded way too early."

Epstein added that Campana and colleagues "demonstrated a working wireless e-mail system on AT&T's network in 1991."

Some of NTP's patented claims were invalidated upon being challenged in front of the US Patent and Trademark Office, but enough stood for NTP sue major smartphone makers in 2010. The company then won a US Court of Appeals ruling in 2011 upholding the validity of many of the patents that were previously called invalid by the US Patent Office. That favorable ruling likely helped NTP win the settlement it announced today.

While NTP's announcement stated that it holds eight patents related to wireless e-mail technology, the company has at least a couple dozen overall. Epstein said the licensing agreement gives the 13 companies coverage under NTP's entire patent portfolio, not just the eight patents referenced in the announcement.

We're trying to get confirmation from the companies involved in the settlement. So far, Microsoft has declined to comment.

Surely the entire cellphone industry could have scraped together enough cash to hire a pack of rabid lawyers to beat NTP's legal clowns into oblivion? Or perhaps settling cost less than the legal fees?

Don't forget that NTP had a $600 million (minus operations) war chest from beating on RIM. The big companies could have done that, but likely NTP made an offer that was cheaper than litigating everything into the ground, so said companies settled.

The problem with settling with these dirtbags is it validates their "business model" which will be emulated by others. It's like paying protection money to organized crime, it gets them to leave you alone right now but guarantees you will be paying something to someone forever.

I had hoped patent trolls targeting larger companies would create a push for patent reform, since irritating a bunch of rich guys is one of the fastest way to create legislation in the states. Unfortunately it seems some of the big players think they can "win" this arms through blocking competition (Apple) or rent-seeking (Microsoft).

Maybe someday one of these cases will make it to a high court and get software, business method, or obviousThing+redCar+onATuesday patents invalidated.

Surely the entire cellphone industry could have scraped together enough cash to hire a pack of rabid lawyers to beat NTP's legal clowns into oblivion? Or perhaps settling cost less than the legal fees?

Surely the entire cellphone industry could have scraped together enough cash to hire a pack of rabid lawyers to beat NTP's legal clowns into oblivion? Or perhaps settling cost less than the legal fees?

As I already posted, if they asked for a ridiculously low fee, it would have been cheaper to license than to fight.

Surely the entire cellphone industry could have scraped together enough cash to hire a pack of rabid lawyers to beat NTP's legal clowns into oblivion? Or perhaps settling cost less than the legal fees?

Don't forget that NTP had a $600 million (minus operations) war chest from beating on RIM. The big companies could have done that, but likely NTP made an offer that was cheaper than litigating everything into the ground, so said companies settled.

Surely the entire cellphone industry could have scraped together enough cash to hire a pack of rabid lawyers to beat NTP's legal clowns into oblivion? Or perhaps settling cost less than the legal fees?

Hah. You'd have to get all the companies to agree to do something for the greater good of their industry.

No, it's not.It's rather obvious to anyone who does not have a preconceived notion that NTP are patent trolls that the phrase by Bloomberg journalists [eight US patents "relating to the delivery of electronic mail over wireless systems"] does not imply either the comparison you made nor the simplicity that you are implying that the patent has.

It could be patent trolling but dismissive responses without looking into the patent make it hard to take criticism of NTP seriously.

NTP has been called a "patent troll," namely a company that makes no technology of its own but uses patents to sue others. While NTP doesn't make any of its own technology, Epstein said it was created with the intention of building technology, not suing. NTP was founded by Thomas Campana, who filed for and received dozens of patents before dying in 2004. One representative patent describes an "Electronic mail system with RF communications to mobile processors," and was awarded to Campana in 2001.

Epstein said NTP did try to make its own products in the early 1990s, but was too early. "NTP [and its predecessor company] was working on building systems to send e-mail over wireless systems in 1990, '91, and '92," Epstein said. "In that era, almost no one had e-mail, and cell phones were the size of brief cases. They were way too early. They were founded to become a product company, but they were founded way too early."

So why didn't they continue as a "product company" when mobile communications came into its own 10 years later? Oh yea, because it's easier to patent troll companies who basically proved your broad 'invention' can be implemented by someone skilled in the art. I can almost guarantee that NTP's patents did nothing to further wireless communications.

No, it's not.It's rather obvious to anyone who does not have a preconceived notion that NTP are patent trolls that the phrase by Bloomberg journalists [eight US patents "relating to the delivery of electronic mail over wireless systems"] does not imply either the comparison you made nor the simplicity that you are implying that the patent has.

It could be patent trolling but dismissive responses without looking into the patent make it hard to take criticism of NTP seriously.

Well why don't you, you know, take a look at them yourself and see if there is anything you can glean from it that is new and novel and not just another patent on existing technology "on a mobile device?"

Pretty much at this point it was fought to the death by RIM, so it isn't going anywhere until it expires.

It stuns me that such an operation was even granted a patent in the first place.

Patent examiners are incompetent.

Incompetent or overwhelmed with the number of patents filed on a yearly basis? Seriously, there aren't enough people in the US patent office to look with any depth into the filings. Obvious idiocy doesn't make it through the system but anything else probably will because the examiners don't have the time to look at them the way that they should.

No, it's not.It's rather obvious to anyone who does not have a preconceived notion that NTP are patent trolls that the phrase by Bloomberg journalists [eight US patents "relating to the delivery of electronic mail over wireless systems"] does not imply either the comparison you made nor the simplicity that you are implying that the patent has.

It could be patent trolling but dismissive responses without looking into the patent make it hard to take criticism of NTP seriously.

Your dismissal of my argument shows that you have little (and likely zero) knowledge of the way any of these systems actually work on the back end.

There is no logistical difference to "delivering" messages over a wireless connection versus a wired connection or any other method. Delivery is delivery, whether pushed or pulled, using POP3, IMAP/Exchange or any other method, pure and simple.

"Getting" your email through "checking" it is analogous to literally walking down to your mailbox at the street corner, opening it, seeing if there are any messages, and then returning to your house.

"Push notifications" are directly analogous to a FedEx/UPS delivery man coming to your doorstep to give you a package.

The back end technologies that are already used are irrelevant. The technology to accomplish the task of "email push over wireless" is fundamentally no different than any other "wired" IMAP system in existence.

...and before you ask, yes, I have read over the patent linked in the article.

That patent should have been revoked once people realized that it didn't describe any new "method"; in fact, all it really describes is the necessary network communication needed to make it happen: something that would be patently obvious to any network engineer working with that system.

Good for NTP. These and other "patent trolls" are an enterprising bunch using perfectly legal tactics to make money. They're leveraging a broken system to their own benefit similar to how the super-rich use teams of accountants to leverage broken IRS tax code to their advantage.

To be greedy is human -- that is now and has always been the case. But that's not the real problem. The problem is the patent system itself. I, for one, hope cases like this continue to succeed so that, eventually, congress will get off its collective ass and make the proper changes. Only then will "patent trolls" be forced to go away.

Patent law trials date back to at least the 1800s. I think they're long since dead

Patent law dates back to early merchantilist England were the royal crown would award 'letters of patent' that would grant monopolies on various trades to politically favored businesses.

Nothing much has changed in this regard.

NTP = Vampires.

They are a company that utterly failed to produce any positive impact on the market. They claim they were innovators, but yet utterly failed to capitalize on any of it and instead their potential competitors (I say 'potential' because you actually have to compete to have competitors) came out with useful products first.

This is a bunch of people that are trying to make millions of dollars off of other people's work, products, innovations, and off of other people's customers. They produced nothing of value, never will produce anything of value, and impact on technical innovation is just about nil.

They are failures in every sense of the word except for the fact that they spent their money on lawyers instead of actual products and are able to use the government to bank off of it. If it wasn't for the fact that the government was the party responsible for the enforcement their behavior would be blatantly illegal. Amounting to little more then just plain theft.

It stuns me that such an operation was even granted a patent in the first place.

Patent examiners are incompetent.

That is a generalization based on ignorance and personal bias. I know two patent examiners personally and they are incredibly bright individuals who were experts in the areas they examined BEFORE they worked for the Patent Office.

It stuns me that such an operation was even granted a patent in the first place.

Patent examiners are incompetent.

That is a generalization based on ignorance and personal bias. I know two patent examiners personally and they are incredibly bright individuals who were experts in the areas they examined BEFORE they worked for the Patent Office.

To be greedy is human -- that is now and has always been the case. But that's not the real problem. The problem is the patent system itself. I, for one, hope cases like this continue to succeed so that, eventually, congress will get off its collective ass and make the proper changes. Only then will "patent trolls" be forced to go away.

So how to you think congress will solve it when humans are greedy, or more accurately, selfish? Isn't that the real issue???

To be greedy is human -- that is now and has always been the case. But that's not the real problem. The problem is the patent system itself. I, for one, hope cases like this continue to succeed so that, eventually, congress will get off its collective ass and make the proper changes. Only then will "patent trolls" be forced to go away.

So how to you think congress will solve it when humans are greedy, or more accurately, selfish? Isn't that the real issue???

Um, they won't solve it.

The only reason this gets solved is if people with money convinces Congress to pass laws that fix this problem.